Defamation actionable without proof of special damage
In proceedings for defamation, it is not necessary to allege or prove special damage.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 4(1)
5-
Malicious falsehood actionable without proof of special damage
In proceedings for slander of title, slander of goods, or other malicious falsehood, it is not necessary to allege or prove special damage if the publication of the matter that is the subject of the proceedings is likely to cause pecuniary loss to the plaintiff.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 5(1)
6-
Proceedings for defamation brought by body corporate
Proceedings for defamation brought by a body corporate shall fail unless the body corporate alleges and proves that the publication of the matter that is the subject of the proceedings—
(a)
Has caused pecuniary loss; or
(b)
Is likely to cause pecuniary loss—
to that body corporate.
7-
Single publication to constitute one cause of action
Proceedings for defamation based on a single publication constitute one cause of action, no matter how many imputations the published matter contains.
In proceedings for defamation, the defence known before the commencement of this Act as the defence of justification shall, after the commencement of this Act, be known as the defence of truth.
(2)
In proceedings for defamation based on only some of the matter contained in a publication, the defendant may allege and prove any facts contained in the whole of the publication.
(3)
In proceedings for defamation, a defence of truth shall succeed if—
(a)
The defendant proves that the imputations contained in the matter that is the subject of the proceedings were true, or not materially different from the truth; or
(b)
Where the proceedings are based on all or any of the matter contained in a publication, the defendant proves that the publication taken as a whole was in substance true, or was in substance not materially different from the truth.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 7
Honest opinion
9-
Honest opinion
In proceedings for defamation, the defence known before the commencement of this Act as the defence of fair comment shall, after the commencement of this Act, be known as the defence of honest opinion.
10-
Opinion must be genuine
(1)
In any proceedings for defamation in respect of matter that includes or consists of an expression of opinion, a defence of honest opinion by a defendant who is the author of the matter containing the opinion shall fail unless the defendant proves that the opinion expressed was the defendant's genuine opinion.
(2)
In any proceedings for defamation in respect of matter that includes or consists of an expression of opinion, a defence of honest opinion by a defendant who is not the author of the matter containing the opinion shall fail unless,—
(a)
Where the author of the matter containing the opinion was, at the time of the publication of that matter, an employee or agent of the defendant, the defendant proves that—
(i)
The opinion, in its context and in the circumstances of the publication of the matter that is the subject of the proceedings, did not purport to be the opinion of the defendant; and
(ii)
The defendant believed that the opinion was the genuine opinion of the author of the matter containing the opinion:
(b)
Where the author of the matter containing the opinion was not an employee or agent of the defendant at the time of the publication of that matter, the defendant proves that—
(i)
The opinion, in its context and in the circumstances of the publication of the matter that is the subject of the proceedings, did not purport to be the opinion of the defendant or of any employee or agent of the defendant; and
(ii)
The defendant had no reasonable cause to believe that the opinion was not the genuine opinion of the author of the matter containing the opinion.
(3)
A defence of honest opinion shall not fail because the defendant was motivated by malice.
11-
Defendant not required to prove truth of every statement of fact
In proceedings for defamation in respect of matter that consists partly of statements of fact and partly of statements of opinion, a defence of honest opinion shall not fail merely because the defendant does not prove the truth of every statement of fact if the opinion is shown to be genuine opinion having regard to—
(a)
Those facts (being facts that are alleged or referred to in the publication containing the matter that is the subject of the proceedings) that are proved to be true, or not materially different from the truth; or
(b)
Any other facts that were generally known at the time of the publication and are proved to be true.
In any proceedings for defamation in which the defendant relies on a defence of honest opinion, the fact that the matter that is the subject of the proceedings attributes a dishonourable, corrupt, or base motive to the plaintiff does not require the defendant to prove anything that the defendant would not be required to prove if the matter did not attribute any such motive.
Absolute privilege
13-
Absolute privilege in relation to Parliamentary proceedings
(1)
Proceedings in the House of Representatives are protected by absolute privilege.
(2)
Any live broadcast, by any broadcaster, of proceedings in the House of Representatives is protected by absolute privilege.
(3)
The following publications are protected by absolute privilege:
(a)
The publication, by or under the authority of the House of Representatives, of any document:
(b)
The publication, to the House of Representatives, of any document, either by presenting the document to, or laying the document before, the House of Representatives:
(c)
The publication, by or under the authority of the House of Representatives, or under the authority of any enactment, of an official or authorised record of the proceedings of the House of Representatives:
(d)
The publication of a correct copy of any document or record to which paragraph (a) or paragraph (c) of this subsection applies.
Compare: 1954 No 46 ss 18, 19
14-
Absolute privilege in relation to judicial proceedings and other legal matters
(1)
Subject to any provision to the contrary in any other enactment, in any proceedings before—
(a)
A tribunal or authority that is established by or pursuant to any enactment and that has power to compel the attendance of witnesses; or
(b)
A tribunal or authority that has a duty to act judicially,—
anything said, written, or done in those proceedings by a member of the tribunal or authority, or by a party, representative, or witness, is protected by absolute privilege.
(2)
A communication between any person (in this subsection referred to as the client) and a barrister or a solicitor for the purpose of enabling the client to seek or obtain legal advice, and a communication between that solicitor and any barrister for the purpose of enabling legal advice to be provided to the client, are protected by absolute privilege.
15-
Other rules of law relating to absolute privilege not affected
Nothing in section 13 or section 14 of this Act limits any other rule of law that relates to absolute privilege.
Qualified privilege
16-
Qualified privilege
(1)
Subject to sections 17 and 19 of this Act, the matters specified in Part 1 of Schedule 1 to this Act are protected by qualified privilege.
(2)
Subject to sections 17 to 19 of this Act, the publication of a report or other matter specified in Part 2 of Schedule 1 to this Act is protected by qualified privilege.
(3)
Nothing in this section limits any other rule of law relating to qualified privilege.
Nothing in subsection (1) or subsection (2) of section 16 of this Act protects the publication of any report or other matter where the publication of that report or matter is prohibited by law, or by a lawful order, in New Zealand or in a territory in which the subject-matter of the report or matter arose.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 17(3)(a)
18-
Restrictions on qualified privilege in relation to Part 2 of Schedule 1
(1)
Nothing in section 16(2) of this Act protects the publication of a report or other matter specified in Part 2 of Schedule 1 to this Act unless, at the time of that publication, the report or matter is a matter of public interest in any place in which that publication occurs.
(2)
In any proceedings for defamation in respect of the publication in any newspaper, or as part of a programme or service provided by a broadcaster, of a report or other matter specified in Part 2 of Schedule 1 to this Act, a defence of qualified privilege under section 16(2) of this Act shall fail if the plaintiff alleges and proves—
(a)
That the plaintiff requested the defendant to publish, in the manner in which the original publication was made, a reasonable letter or statement by way of explanation or contradiction; and
(b)
That the defendant has refused or failed to comply with that request, or has complied with that request in a manner that, having regard to all the circumstances, is not adequate or not reasonable.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 17(2), (3)(b)
19-
Rebuttal of qualified privilege
(1)
In any proceedings for defamation, a defence of qualified privilege shall fail if the plaintiff proves that, in publishing the matter that is the subject of the proceedings, the defendant was predominantly motivated by ill will towards the plaintiff, or otherwise took improper advantage of the occasion of publication.
(2)
Subject to subsection (1) of this section, a defence of qualified privilege shall not fail because the defendant was motivated by malice.
Compare: 1954 No 46 s 17(2)
General
20-
Joint publishers
(1)
In any proceedings for defamation in respect of matter that includes or consists of an expression of opinion, a defence of honest opinion shall not fail merely because the opinion expressed by any person jointly responsible with the defendant for the publication of that matter was not that person's genuine opinion.
(2)
In proceedings for defamation, a defence of qualified privilege shall not fail merely because any person jointly responsible with the defendant for the publication of the matter in respect of which the proceedings are brought is proved, in publishing the matter, to have been motivated by ill will towards the plaintiff, or otherwise to have taken improper advantage of the occasion of publication.
(3)
Subsections (1) and (2) of this section apply whether or not the person jointly responsible with the defendant for the publication of the matter is a defendant in the proceedings.
(4)
Nothing in this section affects the liability of a defendant in any proceedings for defamation for any act of the defendant's employee or agent.
